68 6. E. Ummer Bava v. CIT Kerala High Court

72 Taxmann.com 123High Court2016#16080 most cited
6

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2021.

Judgments citing 68 6. E. Ummer Bava v. CIT Kerala High Court

Joint CIT (OSD) CC 7(4), Mumbai vs. M/S Shalimar Housing & Finance Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 4079/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jun 2021AY 2013-14
Section 133(6)Section 68

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” Bench, Mumbai Shri Shamim Yahya (AM) & Shri Pavankumar Gadale (JM) I.T.A. No. 4079/Mum/2019 (Assessment Year 2013-14) Vs. M/s. Shalimar Housing & JCIT(OSD)-CC-7(4) Room No. 659 Finance Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan 505, Shalimar Morya Park M.K. Road Andheri West Mumbai-400 020. Mumbai-400 053. PAN : AAACS6732N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Vijay Mehta Department by Shri Rajesh Kumar Date of Hearing 16.03.2021 Date of Pronouncement 01.06.2021 O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya (AM) :- This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of learned CIT(A) dated 22.3.2019 an…

Sudhir Jain HUF, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 25(1), New Delhi

In the result, all the 04 appeals of different assesses are dismissed

ITA 1741/DEL/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Feb 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhuassessment Year: 2005-06 Smt. Meenu Jain, Ito, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. Ward : 25 (1), Pitampura, New Delhi – 34 New Delhi (Pan: Aalpj5836E) A N D Assessment Year: 2005-06 Smt. Sushma Jain, Ito, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. Ward : 25 (1), Pitampura, New Delhi – 34 New Delhi (Pan: Aagpj6675A) A N D Assessment Year: 2005-06 Smt. Daya Jain, Ito, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. Ward : 25 (1), Pitampura, New Delhi – 34 New Delhi (Pan: Adrpj4409L) A N D Assessment Year: 2005-06 Shri Sudhir Jain (Huf), Ito, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. Ward : 25 (1), Pitampura, New Delhi – 34 New Delhi (Pan: Aalpj5836E) (Appellants) (Respondents)

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2005-06 Smt. Meenu Jain, ITO, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. WARD : 25 (1), Pitampura, NEW DELHI – 34 NEW DELHI (PAN: AALPJ5836E) A N D Assessment Year: 2005-06 Smt. Sushma Jain, ITO, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. WARD : 25 (1), Pitampura, NEW DELHI – 34 NEW DELHI (PAN: AAGPJ6675A) A N D Assessment Year: 2005-06 Smt. Daya Jain, ITO, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. WARD : 25 (1), Pitampura, NEW DELHI – 34 NEW DELHI (PAN: ADRPJ4409L) A N D Assessment Year: 2005-06 Shri Sudhir Jain (HUF), ITO, 158, Rajdhani…

Daya Jain, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 25(1), New Delhi

In the result, all the 04 appeals of different assesses are dismissed

ITA 1740/DEL/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Feb 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhuassessment Year: 2005-06 Smt. Meenu Jain, Ito, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. Ward : 25 (1), Pitampura, New Delhi – 34 New Delhi (Pan: Aalpj5836E) A N D Assessment Year: 2005-06 Smt. Sushma Jain, Ito, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. Ward : 25 (1), Pitampura, New Delhi – 34 New Delhi (Pan: Aagpj6675A) A N D Assessment Year: 2005-06 Smt. Daya Jain, Ito, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. Ward : 25 (1), Pitampura, New Delhi – 34 New Delhi (Pan: Adrpj4409L) A N D Assessment Year: 2005-06 Shri Sudhir Jain (Huf), Ito, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. Ward : 25 (1), Pitampura, New Delhi – 34 New Delhi (Pan: Aalpj5836E) (Appellants) (Respondents)

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2005-06 Smt. Meenu Jain, ITO, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. WARD : 25 (1), Pitampura, NEW DELHI – 34 NEW DELHI (PAN: AALPJ5836E) A N D Assessment Year: 2005-06 Smt. Sushma Jain, ITO, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. WARD : 25 (1), Pitampura, NEW DELHI – 34 NEW DELHI (PAN: AAGPJ6675A) A N D Assessment Year: 2005-06 Smt. Daya Jain, ITO, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. WARD : 25 (1), Pitampura, NEW DELHI – 34 NEW DELHI (PAN: ADRPJ4409L) A N D Assessment Year: 2005-06 Shri Sudhir Jain (HUF), ITO, 158, Rajdhani…

Sushma Jain, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 25(1), New Delhi

In the result, all the 04 appeals of different assesses are dismissed

ITA 1739/DEL/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Feb 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhuassessment Year: 2005-06 Smt. Meenu Jain, Ito, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. Ward : 25 (1), Pitampura, New Delhi – 34 New Delhi (Pan: Aalpj5836E) A N D Assessment Year: 2005-06 Smt. Sushma Jain, Ito, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. Ward : 25 (1), Pitampura, New Delhi – 34 New Delhi (Pan: Aagpj6675A) A N D Assessment Year: 2005-06 Smt. Daya Jain, Ito, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. Ward : 25 (1), Pitampura, New Delhi – 34 New Delhi (Pan: Adrpj4409L) A N D Assessment Year: 2005-06 Shri Sudhir Jain (Huf), Ito, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. Ward : 25 (1), Pitampura, New Delhi – 34 New Delhi (Pan: Aalpj5836E) (Appellants) (Respondents)

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2005-06 Smt. Meenu Jain, ITO, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. WARD : 25 (1), Pitampura, NEW DELHI – 34 NEW DELHI (PAN: AALPJ5836E) A N D Assessment Year: 2005-06 Smt. Sushma Jain, ITO, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. WARD : 25 (1), Pitampura, NEW DELHI – 34 NEW DELHI (PAN: AAGPJ6675A) A N D Assessment Year: 2005-06 Smt. Daya Jain, ITO, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. WARD : 25 (1), Pitampura, NEW DELHI – 34 NEW DELHI (PAN: ADRPJ4409L) A N D Assessment Year: 2005-06 Shri Sudhir Jain (HUF), ITO, 158, Rajdhani…

Meenu Jain, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 25(1), New Delhi

In the result, all the 04 appeals of different assesses are dismissed

ITA 1738/DEL/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Feb 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhuassessment Year: 2005-06 Smt. Meenu Jain, Ito, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. Ward : 25 (1), Pitampura, New Delhi – 34 New Delhi (Pan: Aalpj5836E) A N D Assessment Year: 2005-06 Smt. Sushma Jain, Ito, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. Ward : 25 (1), Pitampura, New Delhi – 34 New Delhi (Pan: Aagpj6675A) A N D Assessment Year: 2005-06 Smt. Daya Jain, Ito, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. Ward : 25 (1), Pitampura, New Delhi – 34 New Delhi (Pan: Adrpj4409L) A N D Assessment Year: 2005-06 Shri Sudhir Jain (Huf), Ito, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. Ward : 25 (1), Pitampura, New Delhi – 34 New Delhi (Pan: Aalpj5836E) (Appellants) (Respondents)

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2005-06 Smt. Meenu Jain, ITO, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. WARD : 25 (1), Pitampura, NEW DELHI – 34 NEW DELHI (PAN: AALPJ5836E) A N D Assessment Year: 2005-06 Smt. Sushma Jain, ITO, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. WARD : 25 (1), Pitampura, NEW DELHI – 34 NEW DELHI (PAN: AAGPJ6675A) A N D Assessment Year: 2005-06 Smt. Daya Jain, ITO, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. WARD : 25 (1), Pitampura, NEW DELHI – 34 NEW DELHI (PAN: ADRPJ4409L) A N D Assessment Year: 2005-06 Shri Sudhir Jain (HUF), ITO, 158, Rajdhani…

Shriprakash V. Sardesai, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cxir 47, Mumbai

ITA 484/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Apr 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R. C. Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 484/Mum/2011 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Ms. S. Padmaja
Section 143Section 271(1)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R. C. SHARMA, AM & SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 484/Mum/2011 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Shri Prakash V. Sardesai DCIT Cen Cxir 47 बिधम/ 3rd Floor, Madhav Vilas, Setalwad R. No. 658, AAyakar Vs. Lane, Mumbai. Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ PAN/GIR No. AMYPS0171J (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri Vijay Mehta प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondentby : Ms. S. Padmaja सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 09/02/2017 Date of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 18/04/2017 Date of Pronouncement आद…

68 6. E. Ummer Bava v. CIT Kerala High Court (72 Taxmann.com 123) — Cited in 6 Judgments | BharatTax